From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Vlastimil Babka <email@example.com> Cc: LKML <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] crediting bug reports and fixes folded into original patch Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 23:54:14 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20201204045414.GP441757@mit.edu> (raw) In-Reply-To: <email@example.com> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 12:43:52AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > there was a bit of debate on Twitter about this, so I thought I would bring it > here. Imagine a scenario where patch sits as a commit in -next and there's a bug > report or fix, possibly by a bot or with some static analysis. The maintainer > decides to fold it into the original patch, which makes sense for e.g. > bisectability. But there seem to be no clear rules about attribution in this > case, which looks like there should be, probably in > Documentation/maintainer/modifying-patches.rst I don't think there should be any kind of fixed, inflexible rules about this. 1) Sometimes there will be a *huge* number of comments and suggestions. Do we really want to require links to dozens of mail message id's, and/or dozens or more e-mail addresses? 2) Sometimes a fixup is pretty trivial; even if it is expressed in the form of a one-line patch, versus someone who does a detailed review of a patch, but doesn't actually end up appending an explicit Reviewed-by, perhaps because he or she didn't completely agree with the final version of the patch. 3) I think this very much should be up to the maintainer's discretion, as opposed to making rules that may result in some rediculous amount of bloat in the git log. 4) It's really unhealthy, in my opinion for people to be fixed on counting attributions. If we create fixed rules, this can turn into people try to game the system. It's the same reason why I'm not terribly enthusiastic about people trying to game Signed-off-by counts by sending gazillions of white space or spelling fixes. If the fix is large enough that for copyright reasons we need to acknowledge the work, then folding in the SoB as for DCO reason makes perfect sense. But if it's a trivial patch (the kind where projects that require copyright assignment wouldn't require executed legal agreements), then perhaps attribution is not always a requirement. Again, there are times when people who spend a lot of work discussing patch may not get attributiionm even if they didn't actually create the one-line whitespace fix and sent it in as a patch with a signed-off-by with a demand that the attribution be preserved. Common sense really needs to prevale here, and I'm concerned that people who like to create rules don't realize what a mess this can create when contributors approach their participation with a sense of entitlement. Cheers, - Ted _______________________________________________ Ksummit-discuss mailing list Ksummitfirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-04 4:54 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-12-02 23:43 Vlastimil Babka 2020-12-03 4:02 ` Dan Williams 2020-12-03 9:34 ` Leon Romanovsky 2020-12-03 9:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2020-12-03 10:40 ` Leon Romanovsky 2020-12-03 18:30 ` Greg KH 2020-12-03 19:04 ` Leon Romanovsky 2020-12-09 0:34 ` Kees Cook 2020-12-09 5:01 ` Joe Perches 2020-12-09 7:58 ` Dan Carpenter 2020-12-09 8:45 ` Vlastimil Babka 2020-12-09 9:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2020-12-09 8:54 ` Joe Perches 2020-12-09 10:30 ` Dan Carpenter 2020-12-09 17:45 ` Dan Williams 2020-12-03 10:33 ` Dan Carpenter 2020-12-03 13:41 ` Julia Lawall 2020-12-03 13:58 ` James Bottomley 2020-12-03 16:55 ` Joe Perches 2020-12-03 19:17 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2020-12-03 19:24 ` Joe Perches 2020-12-03 21:13 ` James Bottomley 2020-12-03 18:52 ` Matthew Wilcox 2020-12-03 20:04 ` James Bottomley 2020-12-04 4:54 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message]
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20201204045414.GP441757@mit.edu \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [Ksummit-discuss] crediting bug reports and fixes folded into original patch' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).